Many
politicians across the U.S. have already made their mind up about
climate change and refuse to consider recent allegations of academic
misconduct among prominent climate researchers, or other plausible
explanations for climate change, such as sun
cycles. Across the country, there are many folks that
haven't blindly accepted the theory, though.

Utah's heavily
Republican state legislature has passed
a new resolution which condemns climate change alarmism.
The resolution lacks any legal authority, but vocally criticizes the
anthropogenic global warming community for ignoring recent
developments.

The legislation, which resoundingly passed by a
vote of 56-17, originally referred to global warming theory as a
"conspiracy", but that term was stricken from the measure
in favor of "climate data".

A small
excerpt from the measure is:

WHEREAS,
there has been a concerted effort by climate change alarmists to
marginalize those in the scientific community who are skeptical of
global warming by manipulating or pressuring peer-reviewed
publications to keep contrary or competing scientific viewpoints and
findings on global warming from being reviewed and
published;

WHEREAS, the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC), a blend of government officials and
scientists, does no independent climate research but relies on global
climate researchers;

WHEREAS, Earth's climate is constantly
changing with recent warming potentially an indication of a return to
more normal temperatures following a prolonged cooling period from
1250 to 1860 called the "Little Ice Age";

The
bill points out that pending warming legislation will earn its
proponents "more than $7 billion annually in federal government
grants". Originally those grants were referred to as the
"the climate change 'gravy train'", but that language was
removed from the measure.

The bill is critical of the U.S.
Environmental Agency and President Barack Obama's calls to regulate
greenhouse gases nationally. Representative Mike Noel says
the warming scare is an example of profiteers posing as
environmentalists and exploiting the public for their own gain.
He states, "Sometimes ... we need to have the courage to do
nothing."

The only potential downside of the measures,
is that they could give local environmentalists means to challenge
future nuclear plant construction in the states. President
Obama has championed
nuclear plant construction, but says that he's doing it to
"combat climate change."

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Gotta love non-binding resolutions. I wonder how much more work would actually get done if political offices had no salaries and these folks could only work on legislative issues in the evenings after working a real eight-to-five.

Was thinking the same thing how many tax payer dollars went to pay these guys for doing basically a fancy press release. Non-binding resolution, come on that is a nothing piece of paper that probably took days if not weeks to finalize.

I concur, this could be a step in the CORRECT direction, by making other politicians aware that we are aware, and putting notice on scientists who make a mockery of science. It is the first step to future criminal prosecutions, by making it known a line is being drawn, and I agree with this that it is not useless...

quote: If it helps to stop cap-and-trade legislation being passed, it'll save us a trillion times what those legislators were paid in salaries.

BINGO! What this does is put in the spotlight the fact that we know they're trying to do government take over, and taxation to the max. This isn't supposed to actually do anything. Those of you saying it's worthless need to get your head out of the sand. This will hinder legislation that agrees with the global warming conspiracy by making those who try to push it aware that there's opposition in public office right now.

State governments can not bind the federal government to anything, this is the only way they can publish their viewpoint. If they want to take it further and introduce binding legistlation to federal legistlature, that could then refer to this legistlation.

But there are too many people on the gravy train at the moment to get it to hault suddenly, it is going to have to be a gradual return to sanity. Which will most likely only occur if 2012 fixes things.

Where is the written that exactly 12 grades are required? By your argument we should expand the system to 13 years and everyone would be that much better off. Instead I would reather see us cut out all of the worthless classes trim public schooling to 9-10 grades.

Regardless of the number of grades the public school system should have concise and quantifiable objectives and should aim to fulfil them in as efficient a manner as possible. If it only takes 9 years to teach the children the ciriculum then either shorten the system to 9 grades or increase the ciriculum to 12 grades worth of content.